Granlibakken Tahoe Energy Retrofit. Placer County m-power Showcase Project Sierra Business Council Granlibakken Management Company

Transcription

1 Granlibakken Tahoe Energy Retrofit Placer County m-power Showcase Project Sierra Business Council Granlibakken Management Company

2 Granlibakken and Greenlibakken 1995-present: Sustainable food choices 1997-present: Water quality management and hotel conservation 2002: Waste stream reduction: Eliminated styrofoam in March present: Water conservation in partnership with TCPUD 2003-present: Sustainable purchasing policy 2003: Lighting upgrades to conference center (ongoing): Forest management NTFPD model 2003-present: Condo upgrades for heat, hot water, lighting, windows 2006-present: Pool complex heating system upgrades 2014-present: Building upgrades with sustainable practices 2015: Composting trials with TTSD Continually evolving and learning Green business is good business

3 Project Conception to Completion May summit on Property Assessed Clean Energy program (PACE) scheduled for September highlighting Granlibakken as a useful case study in the conference May 2016 Installing final control systems

4 Placer County Project Objectives Placer County has joined the DOE's Better Buildings Challenge Forming a collaboration with the local utilities, local vendors and contractors and businesses to gain energy efficiencies; showcasing the unique nature of Granlibakken as an opportunity for a scaleable and long-term energy efficiency project. This process gave SBC and mpower qualifying information from two local and two national energy services companies. Making Progress on County greenhouse emission goals in partnership with county businesses

5 Sierra Business Council Objectives Identify a Sierra Nevada Mountain community process for achieving energy efficiency in older buildings Demonstrate the mpower/pace process for SBC constituents Assist Placer County in rolling out the mpower model for commercial properties Access to Capital for Energy projects in Eastern Placer County

6 Granlibakken Objectives Education and informed investing Overcome ageing building infrastructure High maintenance costs Failing systems No capital improvement funds Reduce Operating costs in extreme conditions Utility costs Maintenance costs Down time Reduce impact on environment Improve on sustainability message

7 The Proposal Process List of measures identified to meet required levels of financial benefit with a detailed summary of the scope of each measure Summary of the expected energy savings attributable to each measure Estimate of the cost to implement each measure, including equipment, materials & labor Proposed implementation process Cash flow estimate Potential rebates and their sources

8 Selection of Contractors Based on preliminary estimated project cost, energy savings potential, and approach, Granlibakken chose Sustainable Energy Services above the others. Performance of the Detailed Energy Study; Establishment an Energy Service Agreement; and Perform Measurement & Verification a project cost of approximately $238,000 with a payback of 6.4 years adjusted after a detailed ASHRE Level II energy study was conducted. October 2014, one large general construction project morphed into 7 unique sub-projects with 6 unique sub-contractors. Granlibakken staff assumed oversight of the total project; scheduling sub-project timelines, sequencing of equipment demolition & delivery, and coordinating subcontracts with all associated equipment and installation suppliers

9 Most Opportunity Conference Center and Kitchen 70+% energy Existing lighting upgrades 25 year old systems High maintenance costs Old refrigeration

10 Project Components HVAC: Air Handlers, condensing units (12), fan coil units Kitchen: Hood and Make-up Air (intelli-hood) Refrigeration (4 systems) Dishwasher Hot Water: Condensing boilers (2) High efficiency domestic hot water tank Variable speed pumps Controls: Replace existing and add components Lighting: LED replacements Eliminated: Power generation and Windows Cost: $676K (size 14,684 sqft)

11 Forecasted Numbers Annual Energy Use Baseline: 544,910 kwh, 36,383 therms Expected: 322,406 kwh, 19,082 therms Actual: To be monitored in the coming year. Expected Energy Savings: 222,504 kwh 17,301 therms Annual Energy Cost Baseline: $104,767 Expected: $60,955 Actual: To be monitored in the coming year. Expected Savings: $43,812/year Energy Conservation Measures Electric NG Cost Reduction Reduction Savings Payback [kwhr/yr] [Therms/y r] [$/yr] [yr] Heating 18,753 15,000 $15, Cooling 69,282 - $9, Building Automation 29,747 - $3, New Refrigeration Compressors & Ecm Evap 16,104 - $2, New Dishwasher 73,173 - $9, Melink Intelli-Hood 10,200 1,983 $3, Lighting 2,745 - $ Windows 2, $ Totals 222,504 17,301 $43, Liberty Utilities Rebate: $11,511

12 Marketing Benefits Granlibakken Tahoe is very concerned about the environment. Our business is inextricably tied to a healthy environment globally and at Lake Tahoe. Snow, Lake and Forest are part of our brand. We can tell our story, but awards add credibility: Cool California: Climate Leader Award NSAA Environmental Award: Finalists for the 2016 Golden Eagle Awards

13 Energy Comparison So Far Energy Use Change April % % % % % 80.00% 60.00% 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% 9/3/ /23/ /12/2015 1/31/2016 3/21/2016 5/10/2016 %$ Change Gas % Therms Change %$ Change Electric % KWH Change

14 Granlibakken Lessons It is not easy Energy evaluation made possible by Placer County process Contractor selection continues through entire process Engineering never stops Vision is not reality promises change when the math gets right We re not there yet and never will be environmental responsibility is a forever commitment PACE funding was the enabler for this project This project was good on many levels and we continue to learn